So let me get this straight. A thread that is ostensibly about the terrorism in Mumbai is really about the foundation of Israel.

Eck brought Israel into it not me, as you well know. You brought Kuwait into it. If you check the thread again you'll see that I answered both of Eck's assertions (that Mumbai and the Middle East were somehow our fault) not just the one about Israel. His full statement was...

"whatever is happening there and in the Middle East is directly and indirectly a result of western (primarily British) imperialism doesn't even need to be mentioned anymore. After all, who drew all those lines in the sand?"

With regard to Mumbai I asked for further information to support the statement and didn't get it. With regard to the Middle East I simply pointed out that since Israel was directly responsible for its own actions the British Empire couldn't be. It was going too far back because in the meantime we established a set of rules that have international acceptance and binding force that have been routinely broken by both Israel and the US - so Palestine is their fault not ours.

Although I don't agree with his point he made a logical connection between Mumbai and the Middle East because he thinks they have a common cause so, yes, both of my responses were ger... central to the thread

The conversation, so to speak, was about European empires and their responsibility for laying the groundwork for the terror in Mumbai. I pointed out that there are other, non-European, empires that have some share in the responsibility, although the latest greatest and most proximate ones were indeed European--and I pointed to the nonchalance that led to the drawing of borders after WW II at the convenience of European map and policy makers. I took Kuwait as an example, largely because it has so recently been a causus belli, but could have just as easily picked almost any Middle Eastern or African country to illustrate the point. I also pointed out that the creation of Israel, done though it was by the UN, was as much an expression of European imperialism as of European guilt, but that in relation to what happened in Mumbai Israel is a side show because other, more obviously important imperial connections are at work in that incident and in the history of India-Pakistan relations. So I've been consistently thinking about the lingering effect of empires in the subcontinent, both before and after European ascendancy.

About Mumbai, as I said before, non-European empires lay the groundwork for the hatred between Islamic Pakistanis and Hindu Indians. The British Empire adds another layer of complexity to that very long-standing division: there's no doubt about the historical fact that the division of the subcontinent into Pakistan and India is a direct consequence of Britain's loss of its empire in south Asia. I wouldn't say that the border between those two countries was drawn in the sand--but close to it, as is the border-drawing in regards to Kashmir, the history of which is too complicated to begin to discuss in a thread like this. So marry Mughul history to British wash-my-hands policy and you end up with Mumbai.

... So marry Mughul history to British wash-my-hands policy and you end up with Mumbai.

Your post fails to deal with my point that we established rules of acceptable behaviour through the UN. That's not a policy of wash-my-hands but one for the orderly development of international relations. Those rules which go all the way back to the Atlantic Charter of 1941 have universal acceptance and amongst other things require respect for a nation's territorial integrity and the observance of humanitarian principles such as the right to life. Britain hasn't broken them in relation to Mumbai or the Middle East. Those who have are answerable for their actions by international agreement in the shape of the UN Charter and subsequent treaties. Your position that Mumbai and Palestine is the fault if the British Empire gives terrorists a way out - they can't be blamed for their actions because Britain is 'directly and indirectly' to blame for everything they do. So it's just as well it's not true and that there are procedures for bringing the true culprits to justice.

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.